"Smart" growth in San Francisco?
Even though San Francisco is only the fourth most populous city in California, it is now the second most densely populated city in the US. Only New York is more densely populated, but our Planning Department, with the acquiescence of our "progressive" Board of Supervisors, is apparently determined to overtake New York.
Let's tally up the known projects and/or city plans and the number of people they will add to the city:
The Treasure Island project will eventually house 19,000 residents. 2,300 people live there now, which means a net gain of 16,700 residents for the city.
Developments in the 19th Avenue corridor---including at Parkmerced---will add 16,850 new residents to that area.
Rincon Hill will have 10,000 residents.
The Market/Octavia Plan will add 10,000 residents to the already-densely populated middle of the city.
UC's proposed housing development for the old extension property on lower Haight Street will cram another 1,000 people into that six-acre property a block off Octavia Blvd., which now carries more than 45,000 cars a day to and from the freeway through the heart of Hayes Valley.
City documents tell us that the south of Market Street area---including the Mission, Showplace Square, the Portrero, the central waterfront, and Mission Bay---will add 56,000 new residents in the next 20 years (pages 36-39).
Add up the population numbers from these projects/plans and you get a total of 110,550 new residents in a city of 800,000, which is a 14% growth in our population.
There's no serious attempt to deal with all the additional traffic in the UC project, the Market/Octavia Plan, the 19th Avenue area, or the Treasure Island project.
This is "smart growth"?